How much power does 55nm save?

As far as we know, the GTX+ is a simple die shrink of G92 so the only differences between it and the regular 9800 GTX are clock speeds and power consumption.

Luckily EVGA sent us one of their GeForce 9800 GTX KO cards, which happens to be clocked at virtually the same speed as the upcoming GTX+:

  9800 GTX+ EVGA 9800 GTX KO 9800 GTX
Core Clock 738MHz 738MHz 675MHz
Shader Clock 1836MHz 1836MHz 1690MHz
Memory Clock 1100MHz 1125MHz 1100MHz
Price Point $229 $209 - $239 $199


With the 9800 GTX KO you can get the performance of the GTX+ today, without waiting for July 16th for availability. What you do lose out on however is power. At idle the new 55nm chip draws about 3% less power than the overclocked 9800 GTX and actually draws 8.7% more power than the stock-clock 65nm 9800 GTX.


Under load, the GTX+ once again draws around 3% less power than EVGA's KO edition, it would seem that the move to 55nm actually doesn't buy NVIDIA much in the way of power savings.

The Test

We're keeping the commentary to a minimum here as this is a quick preview, we'll have a full performance analysis of the entire AMD and NVIDIA product lineups early tomorrow morning as the NDA lifts on AMD's Radeon HD 4870.

Test Setup
CPU Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 3.20GHz
Motherboard EVGA nForce 790i SLI
Intel DX48BT2
Video Cards ATI Radeon HD 4850
ATI Radeon HD 3870 X2
ATI Radeon HD 3870
EVGA GeForce 9800 GTX KO
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX+
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GX2
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
Video Drivers Catalyst Press Driver (8.7 beta)
Catalyst 8.5
ForceWare 177.34 (for GT200)
ForceWare 177.39 (for 9800 GTX+)
ForceWare 175.16 (everything else)
Hard Drive Seagate 7200.9 120GB 8MB 7200RPM
RAM 4 x 1GB Corsair DDR3-1333 7-7-7-20
Operating System Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit SP1
PSU PC Power & Cooling Turbo Cool 1200W
Index Crysis & Call of Duty 4


View All Comments

  • Ytterbium - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Hi, What are the setting you use in Crysis? Reply
  • Pale Rider - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Like one full page of new ATi product information smack in the middle of this preview. Reply
  • ashegam - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Anand or Derek,
    When can we expect 55nm 200 models since they are apprehensive about doing both a die shrink and new architecture together? 6 month, 1 year?
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    NVIDIA probably started working on the 55nm shrink of GT200 as soon as the chip was done, so you can expect a die-shrunk version of it as soon as 6 months but I'd expect one in early 2009.

  • Mr Roboto - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Yeah how weird is that? Two companies that are such bitter rivals both use the same manufacturer. I didn't know they both used TSMC until a few weeks ago.

    Also I know it's just a name but I think Nvidia is retarded for their naming scheme the last few rounds. First the whole 8800GTS 640\320 512\256 then the 8800GSO\9600GSO which is basically a 9600GT and now the 9800GTX+. Really unimaginative and it just shows how much they're trying to capitalize on the 8800 name. They need to fire the guy who jumbled this thing so badly. You would think Jen-Hsun Huang would be on top of things like this. Unless this was his idea?

    Anyways my 8800GTX is still kickin strong, but I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of ATI's lineup.
  • Clauzii - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    In my world, 9800 will always be as in "ATI Radeon 9800Pro" :)) Reply
  • feelingshorter - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Your right and a lot of people would agree. Nvidia's naming is so confusing that most people who aren't so tech savy wouldn't know if a GSO or the GS or the GTS or GT is faster. Not to mention they released the cards with different types of memory (512 vs 640) under the same name with the higher memory being slower, older version of the same card. How many people probably mistakenly bought the 640 version of the 8800GT without knowning the 512 was actually faster? Not everyone reads tech news daily.

    Only the less tech savy customers are the ones hurt, which is most of the customers. Although no one on anandtech would get confused, I know plenty of friends who are and ask me all the time which cards to buy. But even I have to read tech news daily just to keep up with it. This is, YANL, as one review website coined the term (yet another nvidia launch).
  • strikeback03 - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    For that matter, the 9600GSO offerings seem to generally have less memory on a smaller memory interface, but more SPs. So maybe NVIDIA is confused over which should be faster as well.

    And why has Anandtech never reviewed a GSO?
  • formulav8 - Friday, June 27, 2008 - link

    The 9600 GSO is basically the 8800GS video card renamed. Same 192 Bit memory interface and 384MB of memory. I believe 96 Shaders as well.

    The 9600 GT version has 64 Shaders but the clockspeeds are higher than the GS clocks and carries a 256 Bit memory bus.

    Whats sad is the GSO version could beat the GT version in certain things and the GT wins in other things. They are not clearly defined as they should be since they are carrying the same Model #. nVideo has the worse naming so far.

    So if you've seen the 8800GS review then you've seen the 9600 GSO reviewed...

  • Lonyo - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - link

    Are the Oblivion numbers in the chart really accurate?
    You're trying to tell me the 9800GTX+ with 9.3% better core and 7.x% better shaders and the same speed RAM gets 15% better FPS in Oblivion?

    Seems a little odd, unless there are some other changes under the hood, because I don't see how a <10% change in clocks can get you 15% change in performance without something a bit weird going on.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now